雙重促發物下之周邊效果：正負促發物如何影響消費者判斷

全文

(1)國立臺灣師範大學管理學院全球經營與策略研究所碩士論文 Graduate Institute of Global Business and Strategy College of Management National Taiwan Normal University Master Thesis. 雙重促發物下之周邊效果：正負促發物如何影響消費者判斷 Contextual Effect in the Condition of Mixed Primes: The Influence of Positive and Negative Primes to Consumer’s Judgement on Products. 林智慧 Chie Hayashi. 指導教授：蕭中強博士 Advisor: Chung- Chiang, Hsiao PhD. 中華民國 105 年 1 月 January, 2016.

(2) i. 摘要不同於以往的研究，「解譯範圍重疊模型」(Chien et al, 2010) 與 Hsiao 的「互相假設」對於分析影響消費者評價移動的促發效果是更延伸的模型。Chien et al 提出的「解譯範圍重疊模型」、評量對於促發物和目標物之間的消費者態度，並從這兩者之間的解釋範圍是否重疊來決定促發效果為同化效果或對比效果。Hsiao 的「互相假設」提出促發物與目標物之間的互動關係，本研究延伸這兩個理論，探討消費者受多種促發物影響後，對目標物評價的改變。本探討的是當消費者在面對一正價與一負價促發物的情況下，對目標物的評價會如何移動。本研究的實驗結果是四個假設都不支持，但是提供商品評價如何移動的現象。關鍵字: 促發效果、同化效果、對比效果、解譯範圍重疊模型、互相假設、多種促發物、商品評價.

(3) ii. ABSTRACT The Dimensional Range Overlap Model (Chien et al. 2010) and Hsiao’s (2002) Reciprocity Hypothesis are successful models used to analyze the movement of context effects based on consumer judgment. The Dimensional Range Overlap Model applied an overlap or non-overlap method to determine the presence of any assimilation effect or contrast effect in order to measure perceptions of consumers’ overlapping attitudes toward target stimuli and context stimuli. Hsiao (2002) developed an explanation of the contextual effect by discovering a simultaneous shift in the context stimuli and the target stimuli. The current study would like to extend these theories to examine the influence of consumers’ judgements to products under the condition of multiple primes rather than a single prime. We would like to discuss evaluation of the target shift after comparing consumer’s influence of positive and negative primes. Unfortunately, our four hypotheses are not confirmed; however, we did provide the shift tendencies based on product judgement.. Keywords：Priming Effects, Assimilation Effect, Contrast Effect, Product Judgement, Dimensional Range Overlap Model, Reciprocity Hypothesis, Multiple Primes.

(4) iii. TABLE OF CONTENTS page 摘要. ...................................................................................................................... i. ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... v LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... vi Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................ 5 Chapter 3 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES........................... 13 3-1. Theoretical Background ...................................................................................... 13 3-2. The Effects of Mixed Primes .............................................................................. 13 Chapter 4 Research Method ........................................................................................... 17 4-1. Experiment 1 ....................................................................................................... 17 4-1-1. Overview ...................................................................................................... 17 4-1-2. Hypothesis Recap ........................................................................................ 18 4-1-3. Participants and Design................................................................................ 18 4-1-4. Procedure ..................................................................................................... 19 4-1-5. Results .......................................................................................................... 23 4-2. Experiment 2 ....................................................................................................... 25 4-2-1. Overview ...................................................................................................... 25 4-2-2. Hypothesis Recap ........................................................................................ 25 4-2-3. Participants and Design................................................................................ 26 4-2-4. Procedure ..................................................................................................... 27 4-2-5. Results .......................................................................................................... 28 4-2-5-1. Experiment 2A ...................................................................................... 28 4-2-5-2. Experiment 2B ...................................................................................... 30 4-3. Experiment 3 ....................................................................................................... 32 4-3-1. Overview ...................................................................................................... 32 4-3-2. Hypothesis Recap ........................................................................................ 33 4-3-3. Participants and Design................................................................................ 33 4-3-4. Procedure ..................................................................................................... 34 4-3-5. Results .......................................................................................................... 34.

(5) iv. Chapter 5 GENERAL DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSION ...................................... 39 5-1. Conclusion Review ............................................................................................. 39 5-2. Limitation ............................................................................................................ 43 5-3. Research Contribution and Practical Implications .............................................. 44 5-4. Future Research ................................................................................................... 44 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 46.

(6) v. LIST OF TABLES page Table 4.1 Means for the two primes and the target of Experiment 1 .......................... 24 Table 4.2 Means for Prime 1 and the target in condition 1 of Experiment 2 .............. 29 Table 4.3 Means for Prime 2 and the target in condition of Experiment 2 ................. 31 Table 4.4 Means for target, as well as Primes 1 and 2 in Experiment 3 ..................... 37 Table 5.1 Tests Results ................................................................................................ 39.

(7) vi. LIST OF FIGURES page Figure 2.1. An example of ovelap between target range and range of contexual stimulus:Assimilation effect ...................................................................... 8. Figure 2.2. An example of non-overlap between target range and range of contexual stimulus: Constrast effect .......................................................................... 8. Figure 2.3. Assimilation Effect: The perception of the context shift toward the target will occur simultaneously with the perception of the target shift toward the contextual stimulus. ..................................................................................... 9. Figure 2.4. Contrast Effect: The perception of the context shift was from the target will occur simultaneously with the perception of the target shift away from the contextual stimulus ...................................................................................... 9. Figure 3.1. Hypothesis 1 ............................................................................................... 14. Figure 3.2. Hypothesis 2A ............................................................................................ 15. Figure 3.3. Hypothesis 2B ............................................................................................ 15. Figure 3.4. Hypothesis 3 ............................................................................................... 16. Figure 4-1. Hypothesis 1 (Recap) ................................................................................. 18. Figure 4.3. An example of dimensional range for “Hardness of article” explained in the questionnaire ............................................................................................. 20. Figure 4.4. An example of listing of an object, given specific range on the scale for the “Hardness of article” ................................................................................. 21. Figure 4.5. A list of apparel brands logos participants check mark the on that they recognize before contexts free question of prestige level for apparel brands. ....................................................................................................... 22.

(8) vii. Figure 4-6.. Diagram of shift of Prime 1 and 2 in Experiment 1, showing representative values, lower and upper bound values. ..................................................... 24. Figure 4.7. Hypothesis 2A (Recap) .............................................................................. 25. Figure 4.8. Hypothesis 2B (Recap) .............................................................................. 26. Figure 4-9.. Diagram of shift of Prime 1 and the target in Experiment 2A, showing representative values, lower and upper bound values. .............................. 30. Figure 4-10. Diagram of shift of Prime 2 and the target in Experiment 2B, showing representative values, lower and upper bound values. .............................. 32 Figure 4-11. Hypothesis 3 (Recap) ................................................................................. 33 Figure 4-12. Diagram of shift of Prime 1, Prime 2 and the target in Experiment 3, showing representative values, lower and upper bound values. ............... 38.

(9) 1. Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION What and how do consumer’s plethora of knowledge or countless subconscious evaluations in daily life have an influence on their judgment on products? A cognitive category becomes more accessible from memory in processing ambiguous stimuli. (Higgins et al., 1977, 1981; Srull and Hyer 1979, 1980). Multiple primes make consumers more accessible to judgement. Categorization of primes provides the assimilation and contrast effects. In the early study, Herr. (1989) originally explained that judgements in the opposite direction from the primed category are considered contrast effects, while Judgements of the object as equivalent to the primed category are considered assimilation effects (Herr, 1989). In different perspectives, Hsiao (2002) developed assimilation and contrast effects by discovering a reciprocal shift in the context stimuli and the target stimuli. The perceptions of the target and contextual stimulus shifted either toward or away from each other simultaneously in assimilation and contrast situations respectively. Previous contextual effect-related studies only concentrated on the influence of single contexts to people’s target judgment. In the results, those focused less on the effects of multiple contexts on target evaluation. This research, however, explores the idea that consumers usually compare multiple pieces of information in order to evaluate a product; this paper will therefore examine the influence of multiple primes to product judgment. This study integrates examinations of the Dimensional Range Overlap (Chien et al., 2010) and the Reciprocity Hypothesis (Hsiao, 2002). In addition, we develop (replicate) Lu’s master thesis (2014), extending the Dimensional Range Overlap and Reciprocity Hypothesis, which did not provide evidence of simultaneous shifts between dual contexts..

(10) 2. Previous contextual effect-related studies only concentrated on the influence of single contexts to people’s target judgment. In the results, those focused less on the effects of multiple contexts on target evaluation. This research, however, regards that consumer usually compare multiple information to evaluate on product, therefore this paper examines the influence of multiple primes to product judgment. This study integrate examinations of the Dimensional Range Overlap (Chien et al., 2010) and the Reciprocity Hypothesis (Hsiao, 2002). In addition, we replicate the Lu’s master thesis (2014), extending the Dimensional Range Overlap and Reciprocity Hypothesis, didn’t prove the evidence of simultaneous shift between the dual contexts. The Dimensional Range Overlap Model by Chien, Wegner, Hsiao and Petty (2010) applies an overlap or non-overlap to determine the effect of assimilation or contrast effect movements of consumer judgments. It attempts to form “perception of amount of overlap between the target and context range”, so that it makes it possible to interpret overlap or lack of overlap between values of context and target. In detail, the amount of overlap is measured by three factors: the width of context range, the width of the target, and distance between the context and the target. Assimilation occurs if there is overlap between the context and the target. Contrast effect occurs if there is a lack of overlap between them. However, the Dimensional Range Overlap Model has proven that measuring the distance between single context and target would be the amount of overlap. The Reciprocity Hypothesis (Hsiao, 2002), as mentioned earlier, manipulates overlap and non-overlap of target and contexts to test the mutual effects. It measures whether the prime and target show simultaneous shifts toward or away from each other, respectively. Hsiao’s Reciprocity Hypothesis (2002) also observes only one prime to determine contextual effect. Based on these studies, we also attempt to investigate the product judgement by.

(11) 3. measuring overlap or non-overlap between primes and the target, as well as manipulating the simultaneous shift; however, our research replaces the mutual effect of multiple primes to the target. We conducted four experiments to examine the influence of the primes to product judgement. The first experiment measures the effect of positive prime and negative prime, where non-overlap are manipulated between them. In the second experiment, we examine a shift of the target and positive prime. The third experiment shows the outcome of the target and negative prime. In the final experiment, we finally attempt how the target is shifted in the multiple contexts setting. All experiments follow three stages in procedure. Stage 1 is the evaluation of a target’s advertisement. In Stage 2, we manipulate each context’s range based on the target’s evaluation from Stage 1. We conduct Stage 3 after two weeks with the purpose of minimizing any perception of the previously priming task. Stage 3 finally measures for the respective contextual effects between two primes, each positive and negative prime with the target, and both prime with the target. We have predicted the results of four experiments. For the first experiment, positive and negative primes will be contrasted away from each other, the occurrence of contrast effect, since both primes in are different valences with no overlap between them initially. The next two experiments will show the assimilation effects for the shift between each positive and negative prime and the target because the target will be influenced by the overlap with both contexts. According to the Reciprocity Hypothesis, the contexts move simultaneously with the target in the situation where an overlap exists between them (Hsiao, 2002). In the final experiment, the mixed primed condition, the target will shift toward one of prime which overlaps more with the target, while both prime simultaneously overlap with the target. On the other hand, the target will be shifted away.

(12) 4. from another prime which is non-overlapped with the target. Therefore, we have expected a contrast effect between two primes in the post-context effect. These experiments would demonstrate the contextual effect in the setting of simultaneous shift of positive and negative primes. The target’s movement shows either assimilation with or contrast away from the primes. By using the Dimensional Range Overlap Model with the mixed prime condition, we have expected to prove that the target is assimilated more with the prime which owns a similarity with the target. On the other hand, the target is shifted away from another prime due to the difference between these two. They compare the product with memories of familiar brands. Post-priming situations which lead to assimilation and contrast effects are important for consumer’s decisions. The previous study on contextual effect provided information into the contrast and assimilation effects of single primes as they affected each person. The focus of this study is to analyze the mutual effects of multiple primes with the goal of applying the results of these experiments to gradually more realistic situations in the future..

(13) 5. Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW. 2-1. An Introduction to Contextual Priming Effect. Priming is a method that is described in experimental social psychology by Higgins, Rholes, and Jones (1977). and was previously used in a series of studies that involved analyzing personality concepts and the effects of impression formation on subjects in their everyday lives. These studies remain today as the exemplary definition of priming as it is used in various contexts. Consumers tend to be unaware that priming effects affect their everyday judgments about products and services in positive and negative ways by varying degrees. Priming a consumer increases the chances that their subconscious opinions about a certain category or concept will be reflected in their real-world decisions (Sherman, Mackie, and Driscoll, 1990). The two types of contextual effects are the assimilation effect and the contrast effect. Assimilation effect is observed when a subject’s displacement of judgment shifts towards the primed category, whereas the contrast effect is seen when the shift in judgment is inverse to the values of the context stimuli that accompany the primed value (Helson, 1964; Sherif & Hovland, 1961). In a study conducted by Sherman et al. (1978), participants were asked to rate their views on recycling. Participants primed in the contexts of serious issues viewed recycling as much less important than those primed in the context of more trivial issues, thus demonstrating the effects of priming for the assimilation and contrast effects..

(14) 6. 2-2. Empirical Theories of Assimilation and Contrast Effect. Many experiments have been conducted in the past that aimed to show that consumer judgments are context-sensitive based on their priming effects, many of which were designed with the goal of discovering some root causes of assimilation and contrast. Primed categories have been found to have significant impacts on the decision-making abilities of participants. Higgins et al. conducted an experiment in which participants subliminally exposed to as little as positive or negative trait adjectives affected their views on the target ambiguous people they were asked to judge (1977). Similarly, in a series of experiments testing the effects of pre-existing knowledge on priming effects, Herr (1989) found that participants were only susceptible to priming effects when they already had high levels of knowledge regarding the category in question. Herr’s experiments attempted to find the assimilation and contrast effects that participants would experience regarding the prices of hypothetical and real cars. In his first experiment, Herr found that prior knowledge by participants biased both categorization and judgment effects, noting that a variety of factors, specifically prior knowledge on the subject of cars, precluded participants from experiencing the assimilation effect in all but one situation, where the price of real cars is the moderate prime, and the target ambiguous stimuli is the price of hypothetical cars (Herr, 1989)..

(15) 7. 2-3. The Dimensional Range Overlap Model. Three critical experiments were conducted to explore the utility of the Dimensional Range Overlap Model (DROM). Because the Dimensional Range Overlap Model created a model that essentially relied on the existence of judgment overlap, a whole new set of parameters had to be created in order to allow for the presence of overlapping opinions. These parameters which were used as measurements included three major factors. The width of the context range, the width of the target, and the distance between context and target were all used to gauge context priming, target judgments, and movement of opinions pre priming, post priming, and absent priming (Chien et al., 2010). By using these three measurement factors, it is possible to observe the consumer’s behavior toward a target stimuli based on the width of the priming context, the width of the attitude toward the target itself, and the presence or lack thereof of any overlap. In these experiments, participants who responded with substantial overlaps in the primed context and the target suggested that they would experience assimilation, whereas the lack of overlap would suggest the contrast effect instead. Compared to previous theories and models that studied judgment targets, the Dimensional Range Overlap Model was the first developed specifically to allow for the study of participants’ dimensional range as well as overlapping of target judgments. Using the model made visible the behavior of judgment and contextual effects and helped determine that intersections in judgment and priming or lack thereof either confirmed the presence of assimilation or contrast, respectively. The following figures will diagram the assimilation effect as proposed in the Dimensional Range Overlap Model..

(16) 8. Figure 2.1 Assimilation Effect: (1) Narrow Context range; (2) wide target range; (3) narrow relative distance between both context and target’s representative values.. Figure 2.2 Contrast Effect: (1) Narrow context range; wide relative distance between both context and target’s representative values; (3) narrow target range..

(17) 9. 2-4. Reciprocity Hypothesis. While priming studies typically emphasized the shifts in perception of the target, Hsiao’s study (2002) focused on the shift in the contextual stimuli. Specifically, Hsiao proposed that participant susceptibility to contextual prompts created reciprocal shifts in contextual stimuli, either towards the target in an assimilation prompt, or away from the target in a contrast prompt.. Figure 2.3 Assimilation Effect: The perception of the context shift toward the target will occur simultaneously with the perception of the target shift toward the contextual stimulus.. Figure 2.4 Contrast Effect: The perception of the context shift was from the target will occur simultaneously with the perception of the target shift away from the contextual stimulus.

(18) 10. Hsiao devised a series of experiments in order check the strength of the assimilation and contrast effects in the presence of different types and degrees of contextual stimuli. The Reciprocity Hypothesis predicts that when primed towards a certain target, contrast or assimilation effects would be present depending on whether the participant is primed away or toward a certain point of view, respectively. To illustrate this point, one experiment separated participants into three groups. One group would evaluate only the target, a “low-humour stimulus” such as Schindler’s List, one would evaluate only the contextual stimulus, a “high-humour stimulus” such as The Simpsons, and the third evaluated both, starting with the contextual stimulus and ending with the target stimulus (Hsiao, 2002). As is expected of the Reciprocity Hypothesis, participant responses generally showed their opinions shifting away from the contextual stimulus and the target, showing a high contrast effect. The second experiment was designed to test for the assimilation effect using the same methodology, changing only the stimuli. Participants were once again separated into three groups, and all three groups viewed “moderately humorous” films. As both films were relatively similar in tone and mood, the participants’ perceptions of the target and contextual stimuli shifted toward each other, once again lending support to the Reciprocity Hypothesis (Hsiao, 2002). Hsiao’s experiments helped prove the function and potential magnitude of the Reciprocity Hypothesis in the study of context effects and target judgments by demonstrating the simultaneous shifts of attitudes and perceptions over multiple experiments. The Reciprocity Hypothesis therefore expands upon past research that previously emphasized shifts in target perceptions..

(19) 11. 2-5. Extensions of the DROM and Reciprocity Hypothesis. Several studies have expanded upon Chien et al.’s DROM after the establishment of said model. Hsiao’s reciprocity is also employed for the purpose of detecting the simultaneous shift of the contextual effect. In the most recent research, Lu (2014) examined the influence of dual primes on consumer judgements, but failed to confirm Lu’s hypothesis. She pointed out limitations in the number of participants and motivation. We also assumed that participants’ cognitive abilities are not enough to be disrupted when evaluating contexts and targets under multiple primes. Each participant’s post context effect was influenced by their memories of previous priming attributes. In addition, according to her hypothesis, the post priming effect is expected to show that positive and negative contexts contrast away, and therefore the difference between the positive and negative primes should be easily distinguishable. We are concerned that the objects of the priming tasks were not clear in participants’ minds. Finally, there was an obstacle in categorizing contexts easily. In her research data, each participant’s contexts tended to be similar, which meant participants had difficulty assigning contexts to the specific numbers. Lu (2012) also attempted to examine contextual effects under multiple contexts. He expected to see the shift in direction of contextual effects as demonstrated in the Reciprocity Hypothesis. In addition, the new factor of “attitude certainty” was predicted to affect the magnitude of shifts. However, neither proposed hypotheses were able to be proved. The role and potential effectiveness of attitude certainty need further study in order to determine their part in the Reciprocity Hypothesis. Tse (2012) also attempted to find the correlation between levels of attitude certainty and shifts in magnitude. However, she could not prove that a higher attitude certainty.

(20) 12. would result in a smaller shift in judgment, while a lower attitude certainty would allow for a broader shift in judgment. Lin (2006) took a different approach to the use of primes in the Dimensional Range Overlap Model by using exemplar and attribute information primes. In two experiments, Lin was able to prove that both assimilation and contrast were not dependent on the types of primes used (exemplar or attribute), but rather on the range of overlap or lack thereof..

(21) 13. Chapter 3 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES. 3-1. Theoretical Background. Consumers are bombarded with countless subliminal messages that affect their unintentional decisions daily, which make the study of post-priming so significant to the field of consumer psychology. Post-priming situations have been studied through different models and theories to try and measure assimilation and contrast, and include such concepts as “prior knowledge” (Herr, 1989; Yi, 1993), “accessibility of concepts in relation” to activated concepts (Higgins and King, 1981; Wyer and Srull, 1981), awareness of activated concepts (Higgins, Bargh and Lombardi, 1985). The Dimensional Range Overlap Model has shed some light on the role of overlap between prime and target as a major determining factor for target judgment in participants’ minds, regardless of the subjects of context and target.. 3-2. The Effects of Mixed Primes. The current research will be studied with a mixed prime condition, which is the positive and negative primes with the target. We will apply the dimensional range overlap (Chien et al., 2010) into the mixed prime condition. The simultaneous shift will also be expected between contexts and the target, according to the Reciprocity Hypothesis (Hsiao, 2002). Before finding out how the target and primes move in a mixed primed condition, the current research will simply examine the condition of two primes in the absence of overlap. Chien et al.’s DROM (2010) suggested that non-overlap created by a narrow.

(22) 14. enough context would produce contrast. According to Hsiao’s Reciprocity Hypothesis (2002), both perception of the target and contextual stimuli shift away each other, that is to say a simultaneous shift. Thus, the condition of non-overlap between two contexts, one in positive and another in negative valences would show a contrast effect. H1: When prime 1 and 2 have different valences and there is no overlap between the two primes initially, the prime 1 and prime 2 will contrast away from each other.. Figure 3.1 Hypothesis 1 On the other hand, the condition in which a prime creates overlap with the target will be tested. According to Chien et al.’s DROM (2010), an overlap created by a wide enough context range would produce assimilation. Hsiao’s Reciprocity Hypothesis (2002) found the simultaneous shift between both perception of the context toward the target and the perception of the target toward the context stimuli, which shows the assimilation effect. We will observe how each condition of primes on the positive and negative valence shift toward the target. Hence, H2A: For the condition in which the prime on the negative valence of the target is wide enough to create an overlap with the target initially, then both the prime and target will assimilate towards each other..

(23) 15. Figure 3.2 Hypothesis 2A. H2B: For the condition in which the prime on the positive valence of the target is wide enough to create an overlap with the target initially, then the prime and target will assimilate toward each other.. Figure 3.3 Hypothesis 2B Finally, a mixed prime condition is reached. We are interested in how the target will move in the condition in which one prime each on the positive and negative of the target, does not overlap between the two primes and one prime overlaps more with the target.

(24) 16. than another prime. The above Chien et al.’s DROM (2010) and Hsiao’s Reciprocity Hypothesis (2002) lead to the following hypothesis.. H3: For the condition in which the two primes have different valences and each overlap with the target initially, but the positive prime overlaps with the target at a larger amount than the negative prime, and both primes do not overlap with each other, the target will be more likely to shift toward the positive prime than toward the negative prime.. Figure 3.4 Hypothesis 3.

(25) 17. Chapter 4 Research Method. 4-1. Experiment 1. 4-1-1. Overview. Experiment 1 was conducted to observe how non-overlap between two primes, so-called positive and negative primes, leads to assimilation or contrast effects after priming. Chien et al’s Dimensional Range Overlap (2010) proposed that an overlap and non-overlap range between the context and target ranges will produce an assimilation or contrast effect. According to Hisao’s (2002) Reciprocity Hypothesis, both contexts will have a simultaneous shift toward or away from each other. From these studies, we developed two stages for this experiment. We compared the width of non-overlap range which we manipulated by 0.5 between Prime 1 and Prime 2 in Stage 1 and its range after the contextual effect in Stage 2..

(26) 18. 4-1-2. Hypothesis Recap. H1: When prime 1 and 2 have different valences and there is no overlap between the two primes initially, then prime 1 and prime 2 will contrast away from each other.. Figure 4-1 Hypothesis 1. 4-1-3. Participants and Design. A total number of 20 participants aged between 20 to 30 years, are mostly undergraduate and graduated-students from the Business department and MBA at National Taiwan Normal University participated in Experiment 1. These students were recruited on campus during their break time between classes. Two stages of Experiment 1 was held over two to three weeks. Responding to each questionnaire took less than 15 minutes for Stage 1 and less than 5 minutes for Stage 2, in exchange for a chance to win NTD 500 worth of 7-Eleven vouchers. Two stages of Experiment 1 ware conducted by way of within-participants design. Stage 1 is designed for providing items which comes to a participants’ mind within a given range. The ranges of 2.5-4.5 and 5-7 were fixed for two ranges, which can be Prime 1 and Prime 2 in order to manipulate a 0.5 non-overlap range between them. Before filling in the question of items, bunch of brands were randomly listed with the purpose of easier accessibility of items. In Stage 2, participants gave ratings to two contexts which they.

(27) 19. chose in Stage 1. There are one to two weeks between Stage 1 and Stage 2 to observe whether both contexts are influenced mutually after context effect.. 4-1-4. Procedure. A whole procedure was conducted with paper based questionnaires. It was a color printed booklet including twelve-pages for Stage 1 and four pages for Stage 2. Participants were told that they joined the study for the purpose of researching the cognitive responses of young adults for print ads in magazines. They were told that those ads in the questionnaires, were randomly selected from mainstream magazines including very popular brands or brands that are fairly new to the market. In the beginning part of the Stage 1 questionnaire, participants were asked to exercise a range on judgmental dimension with their observation sensitivity.. The first two sample. questions in this exercise compose two dimensions, “hardness of article” and “sweetness of food”, followed by two exercise questions on dimensions of “hardness of article” and “the speed of animal”, as duplicated from Lu’s (2014) Context Effect under Dual Contexts: The Influence of Positive and Negative Primes to Product Judgement. For evaluation of each dimension, participants were asked to give ratings of the representative value, and dimensional range. The representative value is one- point score rating that best represents items from a scale of 0 to 10 in intervals of 0.5. Figure 4.2, the example of the representative value for “hardness of article”, is shown before the main experiment in our questionnaire in order to help them understanding. The dimensional range is a suitable range rating with lowest and highest values in the same scale of 0 to 10. Figure 4.3 indicates an example of dimensional range for “Hardness of article”. Besides these two patterns of rating questions, participants were given a fill-in-the- break type of question to list specific items. Participants were assigned to offer an item within the specific range as seen in Figure 4.3..

(28) 20. Figure 4.2 An example of representative value most suitable for “Hardness of article”. Figure 4.3 An example of dimensional range for “Hardness of article” explained in the questionnaire.

(29) 21. Figure 4.4 An example of listing of an object, given specific range on the scale for the “Hardness of article”. The next part of questionnaire Stage 1 asked about participants’ pre contextual effect item of apparel brands, which would be used as our Prime 1 and 2 in Stage 2. As mentioned earlier in this chapter, we inquired participants to write an apparel brand for Prime 1 as falling between 2.5-4.5 prestige level and Prime 2 as 5-7. Participants may also answer these contexts from a list which contained 34 apparel brands that we prepared. After filling in the questions of apparel brand, filler questions of automobile and mobile phone brands are also arranged to reduce the possibility of participants guessing the aim of our questionnaires. In detail, we asked about the automobile safety levels between 5-7 and 6-8 on the dimensional ranges and level of phone camera quality between ranges 4-6 and 8-10 ranges..

(30) 22. Figure 4.5 A list of apparel brands’ logos. Participants check mark the ones that they recognize before answering the context free question of prestige level for apparel brands.. Stage 2 was conducted after one to two weeks to reduce participants’ accessibility of previously given ratings and item they chose. Participants were told that we randomly selected product advertisement to read before starting the Stage 2. We asked them to mark.

(31) 23. a representative value and dimensional range rates for both Prime 1 and 2.. 4-1-5. Results. Manipulation Check. The manipulation of non-overlap between Prime 1 and 2 was unsuccessful. That is, even though the non-overlap range between Prime 1 and 2 was manipulated to be 0.5, participants reported overlap rather than non-overlap between Prime 1 and 2 in the manipulation checks Moverlap 0.275, t(19) = 0.18, p= 0.094. Prime 1 and 2 evaluations. One sample t-test is applied to analyze the lower and upper bounds of two primes. The lower bound of Prime 1 (M= 3.38) showed a large difference from the manipulated lower bound of M= 2.50, t(19)= 2.98, p=0.009. The upper bound of Prime 1 also generated a higher rating (M= 5.63) from the manipulated upper bound (M=4.50, t(19) =3.957, p= 0.001). On the other hand, the lower bound (M= 5.35) and upper bound of Prime 2 (M= 7.60) did not differ significantly from its initial value of 5 and 7 individually; (t(19) = 0.86, p= 0.401) and (t(19)= 2.22, p= 0.039). The representative values were compared between pre and post-primed conditions. The negative context, Prime 1, created higher post-context prestige rates (M= 4.38; t(19)= 3.523, p=.002) than its average of manipulated upper bound and lower bound (M= 3.50). Therefore, the post context result of P1 shifted upward. Similarly, the positive context, Prime 2, also produced higher prestige rates (M= 6.45; t(19) = 1.616, p=0.122) than its average of manipulated upper bound and lower bound (M= 6.00). Prime 2 was moved upward as well. This experiment found that representative values in both primes shifted toward higher ratings in stage 2 from the values in Stage 1. Prime 1 and Prime 2 did not shift away from each other simultaneously, and as a result, our Hypothesis 1 was not confirmed..

(32) 24. Table 4.1 Means for the two primes and the target of Experiment 1 Prime 1 Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. Prime 2 Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. Representative Value 3.50 4.38 p= 0.002. Representative Value 6.00 6.45 p= 0.122. Lower bound. Upper Bound. 2.50 3.38 p= 0.009. 4.50 5.63 p= 0.001. Lower bound. Upper Bound. 5.00 5.35 p= 0.401. 7.00 7.60 p= 0.039. Prime 1 and 2 Stage 1 Mean. Non-overlap Range 0.50. Distance between Representative Values 2.50. Stage 2 Mean. -0.28 p= 0.094. 2.07 p= 0.087. 3.50. 6.00. 4.1. 4.1. P1 2.50. P2 4.50 4.38. 4.1. 4.1. 5.00. 7.00. 4.1. 4.1. 4.1. P1’. 6.45 4.1. 3.38. P2’. 4.1. 7.60 4.1. 0 Prime 1’s representative value. 5.35. 5.63 4.1. Prime 2’s representative value. Figure 4-6. Diagram of the shift of Prime 1 and 2 in Experiment 1, showing representative values, and lower and upper bound values.. 10.

(33) 25. 4-2. Experiment 2. 4-2-1. Overview. Experiment 2 for Hypothesis 2A and 2B were examining the context effect of overlap of Prime 1 and Prime 2 with the target respectively. We expected an occurrence of the assimilation effect for these experiments. This study ‘s concept of contexts, separates tests of the target with Prime 1 and Prime 2, condition where an overlap between them from Hsiao(2002)’s Reciprocity Hypothesis.. 4-2-2. Hypothesis Recap. H2A: For the condition in which the prime on the negative valence of the target is wide enough to create an overlap with the target initially, then both the prime and target will assimilate towards each other.. Figure 4.7 Hypothesis 2A H2B: For the condition in which the prime on the positive valence of the target is wide enough to create an overlap with the target initially, then the prime and target will assimilate toward each other..

(34) 26. Figure 4.8 Hypothesis 2B. 4-2-3. Participants and Design. 42 young adults, with 21 participants each for experiment 2A and 2B take part in our questionnaires. Most of our participants were undergrads and graduate students from the Business department and MBA at National Taiwan Normal University. These students were recruited on the school campus during their break time between classes. Three stages of Experiment 1 were held over two, three, and four weeks. Responding to the questionnaire took less than 15 minutes for Stage 1 and less than 10 minutes for Stage 2 and 3, and all participants were entered in a raffle for a chance to win NTD 500 worth of 7-11 vouchers. Three stages of Experiment 2 were conducted by way of participants design. Stage 1 was designed to give a score of representative values and lower and upper bounds for the target in order to test the target’s dimensional range pre context effects. Stage 2 was designed to identify participant’s prime 1 and 2 for Experiments 2A and 2B separately. Participants were asked to provide items which come to their mind within a given range. The range was adjusted for prime 1, overlapping 0.5 with negative valence of the target. Prime 2 in Stage 2 of the questionnaire was overlapped with the positive.

(35) 27. valence of the target, the 1 overlap range. Before filling in the question about items, a variety of brands were randomly listed with the purpose of easier accessibility of items. In Stage 3, participants give ratings to the target with Prime 1 and 2 separately, which they chose in Stage 1 and 2. There is approximately one week each between Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 to observe whether both contexts and the target are mutually affected after context effects.. 4-2-4. Procedure.. A whole procedure went through with paper based. questionnaires as Experiment 1. It was a color printed booklet including fourteen pages for Stage 1, eight pages for Stage 2 and four pages for Stage 3. The introductory statement and exercises in this experiment were exactly the same as that of Experiment 1. In this Stage, participants were asked their rates to the representative value and lower and upper bounds for a prestige level of the target. The target’ advertisement was retrieved from the fictitious advertisement, Belissimo, which Lu (2014) produced for Context Effect under Dual Contexts: The Influence of Positive and Negative Primes to Product Judgement. The target advertisement of apparel brand prestige level was designed within neutral ratings, with a lower mean of 3.72 and higher mean of 5.88. After the target advertisement, participants were asked to evaluate several advertisements (i.e. Motorola, McDonalds, and Mercedes-Benz), however, these are filler questions to ensure participants did not guess our experiment’s purpose. In Stage 2 for our questionnaires, participants were requested to list one apparel brand each in Experiment 2A and 2B. The score we gave for Prime 1 and Prime 2 were manipulated to overlap with target 0.5 and 1 each in Experiments 2A and 2B. Participants may also answer these contexts from a list which contained 34 apparel brands we prepared. Similar to Stage 1, irrelevant items such as automobile and cellphone brands were.

(36) 28. included in this part of the questionnaires to reduce the possibility of guessing the purpose of our study. Stage 3 was conducted after one to two weeks of the previous stages to forget given rates and apparel brands they filled in earlier. Participants were told that we randomly selected product advertisement to read before starting Stage 3. We asked them to mark a representative value and dimensional range rates for the target and Prime 1 and 2 respectively for Experiment 2A and 2B.. 4-2-5. Results 4-2-5-1. Experiment 2A. Manipulation Check.. The manipulation of overlap between Prime and the target. was successful. Overlap range between the Prime 1 and target resulted in greater overlap (M= 2.05) than the initial manipulated overlap, 0.5. (t(20) = 5.365, p<0.001) as we expected. Prime 1 and target evaluation. Paired-sample t-tests were conducted to compare each a shift of pre & post-context effect lower bound and its upper bound of Prime 1. The manipulated lower bound (M=1.57) significantly shifted to the post context effect lower bound (M=3.07; t(20) = -7.46, p<0.001). Correspondingly, the manipulated upper bound (M= 3.57) did significantly move in the direction of post context effect upper bound (M= 5.19; t(20) = -7.082, p<0.001). Both lower and upper bounds shifted upwards. Therefore, Prime 1 evidently showed the shift to the target as we anticipated. For the shift of target’s lower bound and upper bound, we also applied the pairedsample t-test. The post lower bound (M=3.143) didn’t shift from the manipulated lower bound of the target (M= 3.071; t(20)= -0.278, p = 0.78). The initial upper bound (M= 5.95) and post context effect upper bound (M= 5.93) indicated a similar rating as well.

(37) 29. (t(20)= 0.085, p=0.93). The target stayed in the same place after post context effect although Prime 1 shifted toward the target. Hence, this experiment did not prove the simultaneous shift. The representative value for Prime 1 and the target were also analyzed to compare the manipulated and post context ratings. The representative value of Prime 1 indicated a higher value (M= 4.18) than the manipulated value (M=2.58; t(20) =-7.01, p<0.001). However, the target only produced a slightly lower prestige rating (M=4.35) than its manipulated value (M=4.45; t(20) = 0.298, p= 0.77). The representative value of the target moved downward, but it couldn’t statistically prove the shift. The representative target value of Prime 1 and the target didn’t show the simultaneous shift of the assimilation effect. As a result, hypothesis 2A was not supported. Table 4.2 Means for Prime 1 and the target in condition 1 of Experiment 2 Prime 1 Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. Target Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. Prime 1 and Target Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. Representative Value 2.58 4.18 p <0.001 Representative Value 4.45 4.35 p= 0.769. Lower bound. Upper Bound. 1.57 3.07 p <0.001. 3.57 5.19 p <0.001. Lower bound. Upper Bound. 3.07 3.14 p= 0.784. 5.95 5.92 p= 0.933. Overlap Range. Distance between Representative Values. 0.50 2.05 p <0.001. 1.87 0.17 p <0.001.

(38) 30. 2.58 4.1. P1. 1.57. 3.57. 4.1. 4.1. 4.45 4.1. T 3.07. 5.95. 4.1. 4.1. 4.35 4.18 3.14. 4.1. 4.1. T’. 4.18. 5.92. P1’. 4.1. 3.07. 5.19. 4.1. 4.1. 0 4.1. Prime 1’s representative value. 10 4.1. Target’s representative value. Figure 4-9. Diagram of shift of Prime 1 and the target in Experiment 2A, showing representative values, lower and upper bound values. 4-2-5-2. Experiment 2B . One participant was eliminated from 21 participants for data analysis due to missing data. Manipulation check. Overlap range between the Prime 2 and target resulted in the width of overlap being slightly wider (M=1.45) than the manipulated overlap (t(19)= 1.23 , p= 0.234). However, this overlap was not statistically significant. Prime 2 and target evaluation. The manipulated lower bound of Prime 2 (M= 3.75) slightly shifted to the post context effect lower bound (M= 3.88; t (19)= -3.98, p = 0.7) while the initial upper bound of Prime 2 (M=5.75) significantly moved to the post upper bound (M= 6.52, t (19) = -3.44, p= 0.03). However, Prime 2 moved upward, which we did not expect. The initial lower bound of the target (M=2.05) significantly moved to the.

(39) 31. post context effect lower bound (M= 2.68, t(19) = -2.27, p= 0.04) while its shift of upper bound didn’t indicate the significant rating. (Pre-context effect upper bound of Prime 2: M=4.75, its post upper bound: M=5.36; t= -2.03, p= 0.06). Thus, the assimilation between prime 2 and target were not confirmed. Paired sample t-tests were also conducted to compare the representative values of Prime 2 and the target. Similarly, the representative value of Prime 2 contrasted away from its manipulated context. Its manipulated representative value was M= 4.75 shifted in the direction of post context representative value (M=5.35; t (19) = -2.77, p= 0.01). On the other hand, the manipulated representative value of the target (M = 3.15) significantly shifted toward to its post rating (M= 3.92; t (19) = - 2.68, p= 0.02). The representative value of the target also moved upward. The representative values also didn’t show the assimilation effect between Prime 2 and the target, therefore Hypothesis 2B was not supported.. Table 4.3 Means for Prime 2 and the target in condition of Experiment 2 Prime 2 Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. Target Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. Representative Value 4.75 5.35 p = 0.012. Representative Value 3.15 3.93 p = 0.015. Lower bound. Upper Bound. 3.75 3.86 p = 0.695. 5.75 6.52 p = 0.003. Lower bound. Upper Bound. 2.05 2.68 p = 0.035. 4.75 5.38 p = 0.056.

(40) 32. Prime 2 and Target Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. Overlap Range. Distance between Representative Values. 1.0 1.45 p = 0.234. 1.60 1.425 p = 0.0630 4.75 4.1. P2 3.75. 5.75. 4.1. 4.1. 3.15 4.1. T 2.05. 4.75 4.1. 3.93 4.1. T’. 2.68. 5.35. 5.38 4.1. P2’ 3.86. 6.52. 4.1. 4.1. 0 4.1. 10 4.1. Prime 2’s representative value Target’s representative value. Figure 4-10. Diagram of shift of Prime 2 and the target in Experiment 2B, showing representative values, lower and upper bound values.. 4-3. Experiment 3 4-3-1. Overview. Experiment 3 was conducted to examine the influence of mixed prime conditions, including positive and negative primes and the target. We expected to see the target shift toward the positive prime than the negative prime as well as the.

(41) 33. occurrence of the contrast effect between Prime 1 and Prime 2. 4-3-2. Hypothesis Recap. H3: For the condition in which the two primes have different valences and each overlap with the target initially, but the positive prime overlaps with the target at a larger amount than the negative prime, and both primes do not overlap with each other, the target will be more likely to shift toward the positive prime than toward the negative prime.. Figure 4-11. Hypothesis 3. 4-3-3. Participants and Design. A total of 20 participants aged between 20 to 30 years who are mostly undergrads and graduated students at National Taiwan Normal University joined Experiment 3. These students were recruited on campus during their break time between classes. Three stages of Experiment 3 were held over three to four weeks. Responding to the questionnaire took less than 15 minutes for Stage 1 and less than 10 minutes for Stage 2 and 3 to finish, and all participants were entered in a raffle.

(42) 34. for a chance to win NTD 500 worth of 7-11 vouchers. Similar to the previous experiment, Experiment 3 followed a participant-sensitive design, consisting of three stages, and paper-based questionnaires. The questionnaire design of Stage 1 is identical to Experiment 2. For Stage 2 of Experiment 3, the manipulated Prime 1 and 2 ranges were overlapped from 0.5 and 1 respectively based on the target that participants rated. Participants were asked to give scores to all targets and two contexts in Stage 3. It takes approximately one week each between Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 to observe whether each context and the target are mutually affected after any context effect.. 4-3-4. Procedure. The whole procedure of Experiment 3 is similar to Experiment 2 except that the condition of testing is two primes with the target at once, unlike in Experiment 2, which examines two primes with the target separately.. 4-3-5. Results. Two participants didn’t reach Stage 3 of our questionnaires, although there were 20 participants for experiment 3 originally.. Manipulation check. Prime 1 and Prime 2. The manipulation of non-overlap between Prime 1 and 2 was unsuccessful. Although the overlap between 1 and 2 is more overlapped (M= 0.14) than the manipulated overlap range of M= 0.5, it was not statistically significant. (t (17) = -0.80 , p= 0.435) Prime 1 and target. The manipulation of overlap between Prime 1 and the target was successful. The overlap range between Prime 1 and the range was manipulated to be 0.5, as a result, participants reported more overlap (M = 1.42, t(17) = 2.95 p< 0.01)..

(43) 35. Prime 2 and target. The manipulation of overlap between Prime 2 and the target failed because less overlap was reported (M=0.64; t(17) = -1.36 p = 0.19) rather than the manipulated overlap range M= 1.0. Evaluation. Prime 1. One sample t-test was conducted to analyze the lower and upper bounds of two primes and the representative value. The post-context effect lower bound of Prime 1 showed a significantly higher rating (M= 2.97) from its manipulated lower bound (M= 2.08, t(17) = -2.899, p = 0.01). Correspondingly, the post-context effect upper bound of Prime 1 was also greater (M= 5.29) than the manipulated upper bound of Prime 1 (M= 4.08, t (17) = -2.91, p = 0.01). Both lower and upper bound of Prime 1 were moved upward. The representative value of Prime 1 was similarly shifted from the manipulated value M= 3.08 to the post context effect value M= 4.28, therefore, it moved upward significantly (t (17) = - 2.842 p = 0.011). As a result, Prime 1 assimilated to the target in opposition of our expectation. Prime 2. One sample t-test was once again applied to examine Prime 2. The manipulated lower bound of Prime 2 (M= 4.94) shifted to the direction of its post lower bound (M=5.42, t(17) = -2.152, p = 0.046). The manipulated upper bound of Prime 2 (M= 6.94) also significantly moved to a higher rate for its post context effect upper bound (M=7.42, t (17) = -2.189, p = 0.043). The representative value showed the same result of an upward shift. The pre- context effect value (M= 5.94) moved to its post context effect value (M=6.61, t(17) = -2.675, p = 0.016). That is, Prime 2 contrasted away from the target. Target. The shift of the target was also evaluated by a paired one sample t-test. The lower bound of the target was shifted slightly from the pre-contextual effect rate (M=.

(44) 36. 3.583) to the post – contextual effect rate (M= 3.750, t(17) = -0.572, p = 0.575) while its upper bound moved from M= 5.944 to M= 6.83 (t(17) = -0.508, p = 0.618). The representative value similarly sifted to a higher rate (M=5.083) from the initial representative value M= 4.61, t(17) = -1.49, p = 0.16). All lower bound, upper bound and representative values have assimilated with the target since these moved upwards. However, all shifts of lower and upper bounds and the representative value were not significantly proven. The shift of target, thereby, was not completely confirmed. Overall, Hypothesis 3 was not confirmed. Since the non-overlap range between Prime 1 and 2 decreased after contextual effects, the result revealed the occurrence of assimilation effect rather than our expectation of a contrast effect. In addition, all three Prime 1, Prime 2 and target moved upward. As outcomes of other experiments, Prime 1 is easily influenced by the target and Prime 2. The shift of target is not as high as Prime 1 and Prime 2..

(45) 37. Table 4.4 Means for target, as well as Primes 1 and 2 in Experiment 3 Prime 1 Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. Representative Value. Lower bound 2.08 2.97 p = 0.10. Upper Bound 4.08 5.28 p = 0.10. Prime 2 Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. Representative Value. 5.94 6.61. Lower bound 4.94 5.42. Upper Bound 6.94 7.42. p = 0.016. p = 0.046. p = 0.043. Representative Value. Lower bound. Upper Bound. Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. 4.61 5.08 p = 0.575. 3.58 3.75 p = 0.618. 5.94 6.08 p = 0.155. Prime 1 and 2. Non-overlap Range. Distance between Representative Values. Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. 0.50 0.14 p = 0.435. 2.86 2.33 p = 0.156. Overlap Range. Distance between Representative Values. 0.50 1.42 p = 0.009. 1.53 0.81 p = 0.064. Overlap Range. Distance between Representative Values. 1.00 0.64 p = 0.190. 1.33 1.53 p = 0.411. Target. Prime 1 and Target Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. Prime 2 and Target Stage 1 Mean Stage 2 Mean. 3.08 4.28 p = 0.011.

(46) 38. 2.08. 3.08. 4.08. 4.94. 5.94. 4.1. 4.1. 4.1. 4.1. 4.1. P1. 6.94 4.1. P2 4.61 4.1. T 3.58. 5.94. 4.1. 4.1. 5.08. T’ 3.75 4.1. 2.97 4.1. 4.1. 6.08. 4.28. 6.61 4.1. P1’. P2’. 4.1. 5.28. 5.42. 7.42. 4.1. 4.1. 0. 10. 4.1. Prime 1’s representative value Prime 2’s representative value Target’s representative value. Figure 4-12. Diagram of shift of Prime 1, Prime 2 and the target in Experiment 3, showing representative values, lower and upper bound values.. 4.1.

(47) 39. Chapter 5 GENERAL DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSION. 5-1. Conclusion & Review. Our studies of contextual effects in the condition of mixed primes couldn’t support all four hypotheses were not confirmed. For our first experiment, we observed whether the influence of two primes caused assimilation or contrast effects, and as a result, these positive and negative primes assimilated toward each other. As we expected, an assimilation effect occurred in the second experiment of the negative prime, Prime 1 and the target, however, it was not statistically significant. Although we expected an assimilation effect between positive prime, Prime 2 and the target in the third experiment, the dimensional range of Prime 2 was widened and its representative value shifted away from the target. Thus, the third experiment was also not confirmed. The last experiment of two primes and the target also failed since two primes assimilated toward each other. While Prime 1 of the forth experiment moved upward greatly rather than downward, the target moved toward Prime 2.. Table 5.1 Tests Results Hypothesis H1. Results. When prime 1 and 2 have different valences and there is no. Not. overlap between primes initially, the prime 1 and 2 will. confirmed. contrast away from each other H2A For the condition in which the prime on the negative valence of the target is wide enough to create an overlap with the. Not confirmed.

(48) 40. target initially, then both the prime and target will assimilate towards each other. H2B. For the condition in which the prime on the positive valence. Not. of the target is wide enough to create an overlap with the. confirmed. target initially, then the prime and target will assimilate toward each other. H3. For the condition in which the two primes have different. Not. valences and each overlap with the target initially, but the. confirmed. positive prime overlaps with the target at a larger amount than the negative prime, and both primes do not overlap with each other, the target will likely to shift toward the positive prime than toward the negative prime.. Two reasons would affect the results that showed the assimilation effect between the positive and negative primes rather than contrast effect for experiment 1. One reason could be the design of the experiment. The other may be that two primes are influencing each other. Participants evaluated brands in two absolutely different conditions for Experiment 1. Having screened the brand lists, they filled in the names of brands for the positive prime falling between the range 2.5 and 4.5 and negative prime placing between the range 5.0 and 7.5. On the other hand, they gave ratings to brands after viewing logos and brief information of two brands. This is to say, participants compared between many brands in the list or only two brands for evaluation. The brand list itself could provide participants with specifying positioning of those brands. In addition, participants saw luxury brands (i.e. Channel, Louis Vuitton, Ralph Lauren) in a list before they filled in Prime 1 and 2. At that time, they could underestimate Prime 1 and 2 for the given values..

(49) 41. Participants assessing only two brands processed comparisons between these two. The assimilation effect arose under the condition of evaluating only two brands, thus, focusing on few brands to compare made its judgement equivalent to the primed categories. Moreover, these brands are in moderate categories rather than extreme categories, although participants distinguish these brands between positive and negative. Therefore, these two primes in closed ratings, the negative prime from 2.5 to 4.5 and the positive prime from 5.0 to 7.0 are partially correlated, which caused the assimilation effect. For the insignificant assimilation effect in Experiment 2A, two causes are considered. First, the presence of the brand list affected the large shift of Prime 1. After prospecting the list, participants filled in a blank for Prime 1 which is manipulated 0.5 to overlap with the target. Subsequently, the questionnaire didn’t show the list for the primed condition, but gave participants the image and brief explanation of P1 and the target. Similar to the cause in Experiment 1, participants had underestimated the brand list by inserting a brand for the negative prime. They gave the higher score to P1 when comparing with the target brands. Secondly, no shift of the target resulted in no simultaneous shift between that and P1, therefore we couldn’t confirm the assimilation effect. The target was always given scores by participants without viewing the brand list, furthermore, it was always the first question asked to P1. Although Lu (2014) didn’t have the brand list and time gap between stages for her questionnaire design, her Experiment 2A also similarly indicated that the target stayed in the same position while P1 shifted dramatically. We are wondering if the anonymous brand setting of the target influenced P1’s shift because it hardly shifted. Experiment 2B also couldn’t be confirmed as the assimilation effect because both positive prime P2 and the target shifted upwards. To put it another way, it was the only experiment which showed the target’s shift was more visible. This experiment’s.

(50) 42. evaluation to the target in Stage 1 was drastically lower than other experiments, which caused it significantly moved upward in the primed condition. For the shift of P2, the brand list influenced the huge inconsistency to evaluation between pre-primed and the primed condition again. P2 failed to shift in the upward direction rather than our expected downward movement. However, we could also say that the target was influenced by P2 in the condition of context effect. Participants gave higher scores to the target when viewing only two brands, the target and P2. Although the target’s shift was not statistically proved in Experiment 3, the target moved slightly toward positive prime P2 since it manipulated the larger amount of the overlap range between these two than that with negative prime. As opposed to our expectation of contrast effect, P1 and P2 indicated the assimilation effect from the nonoverlap range and represented values, furthermore, both P1 and P2 shifted greatly upward. Two assumptions of this upward shift were considered. One could also be attributed by the presence of the brand list. The other could be the relationship of manipulated overlap range and brands prestige among all three. P1 was influenced vastly by the target. When they compare the brand that was given a negative evaluation of P1 and the hypothetical brand of the target which was nameless and anonymous to participants, they gave high scores to P1 due to the trust of the existing brand. On the other hand, compared to the target and P1, participants gave higher scores to P2 because it was more prestigious than P1. It made more difference between these two since the larger amount of overlap range showed more than the manipulated range. In another perspective, the manipulated overlap range created the closer distance between the target and P2 than that of the target and P1, which means the highly overlapped range of target and P2 is more similar than the P1 with the target. Therefore, P1 in the further distance was pulled by the other two..

(51) 43. 5-2. Limitation. Procedural Design. One major limitation we had was the difficulty of acquiring high numbers of participants due to the complicated design and limited time. We conducted entire questionnaires over three to four weeks to complete all three stages. One obstacle was trying to follow the same participants during this period. It was not easy to see them every week due to their absence from the researcher’s targeted classes. Another limitation is that the format of the questionnaire used for the study was a hard copy. The researcher needs to create new questionnaires of Stage 2 and 3 for each participant in order to be suitable for Prime 1 and 2 the brands he or she chose in Stage 1. The speed of producing new questionnaires made it difficult to catch up in real time to conducting questionnaire.. Questionnaire Design. Participants were asked questions in different conditions in pre and post context effects, where they have been provided the list of brands including more than 30 brands in the first stage. However, they were not provided with this list in following stages. Compared to pre context effect conditions, evaluations only focusing on two primes and targets caused different judgement to these three items. There were difficulties arising in the contrast effect with the negative prime of scale between 2.5-4.5 and the positive prime of scale between 5.0 -7.0. Both are close to the neutral ratings while we expected the negative and positive primes to create differences. We are afraid that if these primes are so moderate that participants cannot clearly differentiate them..

(52) 44. 5-3 Research Contribution and Practical Implications. In the current study, we extended the Dimensional Range Overlap Model (Chien et al. 2010) and Hsiao’s Reciprocity Hypothesis (2002) to mixed primed conditions. By offering more complete research of multiple contexts, we hope to provide some practical consumer attitudes to the marketing and management fields. Our study was built from the idea that consumers’ judgements on products are affected by knowledge or evaluations in daily life. The DROM was designed to experiment with a single prime and its context effect on the target. We considered that the mixed primed condition was more realistic than evaluating one prime with the target. Although we haven’t confirmed our hypothesis, our finding or tendencies of context effect under multiple primes can be used to further analyze consumers’ perceptions toward a given product. In addition, this study would contribute to understanding consumer’s evaluations of hypothetical brands (the target) compared to several primes, so marketers can refer to studies on context effects for their marketing strategy.. 5-4. Future Research. Future research may consider our assumptions of tendency shift as we earlier explained in this chapter. First of all, future researchers may consider equal settings of pre- and post- context effect experiments. Its difference of forms would arise unexpected rating. A list of brands for fill-in-the-blank context free questions in Stage 1 was designed to make participants underestimate contexts compared to rating in post priming condition..

(53) 45. In addition, choosing brands on the list should be careful. Although we attempted to prepare various prestige levels for apparel brands based on participants’ evaluations for prestige level in these contexts, the list would give the impression of extreme images (i.e. luxury brands) to participants. Secondly, we recommend avoiding the inconvenience caused by the questionnaire procedure. The current research forces researchers to wait one to two weeks after each stage to prevent the possibility of memorizing contexts and rates from Stage 1 and 2. By replacing Lu’s (2014) Sudoku games between stages, we improve the likelihood of accessibility of each contexts and numbers, and also get better participant’s motivation for each stage. However, the results were not much different between the current and her research. We also changed the questionnaire into a hard copy version compared to Lu’s Excel-run VBA program. The weakness of paper based questionnaires is the necessity of spending a lot of time and effort to produce new questionnaires for Stage 2 and 3 for individual participants. We hope that the future researchers may consider a better way to obtain more participants. Third, the setting of numbers for manipulated overlap ranges can be considered for future research. We assume that the negative range from 2.5-4.5 and the positive prime from 5.0 to 7.0 are close enough to create the assimilation effect. The contrast effect needs to make two primes repel each other, thus these two should indicate clear difference to participants. We believe that future researchers could succeed in their experiments by creating distinct positions of positive and negative primes..

(54) 46. REFERENCES Bargh, J. A., & Chartrand, T. L. (2000). Studying the mind in the middle: a practical guide to priming and automaticity research. In: H. Reis, & C. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social psychology (pp. 253–285). New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.. Chien, Y., Wegener, D.T., Hsiao, C., & Petty, R.E., (2010). Dimensional Range Overlap and Context Effects in Consumer Judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (October), 530—542.. Fazio, R. H., Powell, M.C., & Herr, P. M. (1983). Toward a process model of the attitude-behavior relation: Accessing one’s attitude upon more observation of the attitude object. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 723-735.. Helson, H. (1964), Adaption Level Theory. New York: Harper and Row.. Herr, P. M., Sherman, S. J., & Fazio, R. H. (1983). On the consequences of priming: Assimilation and contrast effects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 232-340.. Herr, P. M. (1986). Consequences of priming: Judgment and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1106-1115.. Herr, P. M. (1989). Priming price: Prior knowledge and context effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 67-75.. Higgins, E. T., Rholes, W. S., & Jones, C. R. (1977) Category accessibility and impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 141-151.. Higgins, E. T., & King, G. A. (1981), Accessibility of social constructs: Information processing consequences of individual and contextual variability. In N. Cantor &.

(55) 47. J. Kihlstrom (Eds.), Personality cognition, and social interaction (pp.69-121). Hillsdales, NJ: Erlbaum.. Higgins, E. T., Bargh, J. A., & Lombardi, W. J. (1985). Nature of priming effects on categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 59-69.. Hsiao, C. (2002). The Reciprocity Hypothesis As an Explanation of Perception Shifts in Product Judgment. Dissertation, Purdue University.. Lin, C. (2006). Examining Effects of Attribute and Exemplar Priming on Product Judgments through the Dimensional Range Overlap Model. Master’s Thesis, National Taiwan University.. Lombardi, W. J., Higgins, E. T., & Bargh, J. A. (1987). The role of consciousness in priming effects on categorization: Assimilation versus contrast as a function of awareness of the priming task. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 411-429.. Lu, Eunice R. (2014). Context Effect under Dual Contexts: The Influence of Positive and Negative Primes to Product Judgement. Master’s Thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.. Lu, T. (2012). Context Effects under Multiple Contexts: An Extension of Dimensional Range Overlap Model. Master’s Thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.. Meyers-Levy, J., & Sternthal, B. (1993). A two-factor explanation of assimilation and contrast effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 30, 359-368.. Meyers-Levy, J., (1989). Priming Effects on Product Judgements: A Hemispheric Interp. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 76-86..

(56) 48 Petty, Richard E., John T. Cacioppo & David Schumann (1983), “Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement,” Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (September), 2, 135-146. Petty, Richard E. & Duane T. Wegener (1993), “Flexible Correction Processes in Social Judgment: Correcting for Context-Induced Contrast,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29 (March), 137-165.. Segal, S. J. Cofer, C. N. (1960). The effect of recency and recall on word association. American Psychologist, 15, 451.. Sherif, M., & Hovland, C.I. (1961). Social judgement: Assimilation and contrast effects in communication and attitude change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Sherman, Steven J., Karin Ahlm, Leonard Berman, and Steven Lynn (1978), "Contrast Effects and Their Relationship to Subsequent Behavior," Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14 (July), 340-350.. Srull, T. K., & Wyer, R. S. (1979). The role of category accessibility in the interpretation of information about persons: Some determinants and implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1660-1672.. Tse, C. (2012). The Context Effect of Dual Primes: The Influence of Positive Primes and Negative Primes On Product Judgment. Master’s Thesis, National Taiwan University.. Tulving, E. (1985). Memory and consciousness. Canadian Psychology, 26, 1-12.. Wyer, R. S., & Srull, T. K. (1989). Memory and cognition in its social context. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum..

(57) 49. Yi, Y. (1990). The effects of contextual priming in print advertisements. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 215-222.. Yi, Y. (1993). Contextual priming effects in print advertisements: The moderating role of prior knowledge. Journal of Advertising, 22, 1-10..

(58)